deafTunes123
02-21 01:12 PM
As per my Lawyer, You can file I-140 under both Eb2 and EB3(Porting PD from EB3 to EB2 or vice-versa). which ever the Date becomes current, you can ask the IO to use that particular category.
wallpaper wallpaper art, desktop
sanatshah
08-10 02:52 PM
Count me in.
qesehmk
02-11 03:03 PM
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree. I tried to see if there is a way FB category in 2009 might have received a spillover from EB. But thats almost impossible given EB is severely backlogged.
Another way to verify unused 13K in 2009 EB would be to check 2010 FB limit. If there were unused visas from EB in 2009 then they go back to FB in 2010.
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available .... neither inside or outside category. It is frightening to think that with so many preadjudicated cases USCIS might be wasting visas! I don't believe this .... but if true ... it is outrageous.
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree. I tried to see if there is a way FB category in 2009 might have received a spillover from EB. But thats almost impossible given EB is severely backlogged.
Another way to verify unused 13K in 2009 EB would be to check 2010 FB limit. If there were unused visas from EB in 2009 then they go back to FB in 2010.
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available .... neither inside or outside category. It is frightening to think that with so many preadjudicated cases USCIS might be wasting visas! I don't believe this .... but if true ... it is outrageous.
2011 as a desktop wallpaper
3d Nirvana
02-27 09:39 PM
nice BLUE! That was exactly the site I was looking for. :)
more...
getgreensoon1
05-23 02:26 PM
what is your job?
Definitely much better than a computer operators'. I have high regards for people who work at reputed companies such as MS, ORCL, Apple though. By computer operator i mean people who try to speak english but sound as if they are speaking telugu.
Definitely much better than a computer operators'. I have high regards for people who work at reputed companies such as MS, ORCL, Apple though. By computer operator i mean people who try to speak english but sound as if they are speaking telugu.
gsc999
09-20 02:37 AM
Congratulations to all of us for having marched yesterday, I was extremely impressed with the level of organization. Salut to everyone who made it possible.
However, I have a whole bunch of points, sorry if they come out strong....
1) I absolutely agree with the 'Legal' Immigration issue, we did look as if we were immigrants and not defined as legal, I think high-skilled is secondary to the legality... This is one of the reasons I have not purchased merchandise, as it looks like it addresses immigration as such. I think banner by Chinese group exphasizing the legal aspect looked very impressive..
2) It was obvious from speeches on Monday night and yesterday (friendship between US and India comments, etc) that this is seen as an Indian issue. Unless you are trying to show it as such, something has to be done about it. Non-indians were marching with you as well, and next time effort should be made to put together Indian, Chinese and whoever else when putting pictures, RollCall for example, or talking to the press, or talking to representatives. I have expressed my desire and submitted all information to the person in charge of organizing meetings on Capitol Hill, but was not provided with this oppportunity..
Basically, it was clear that, as of now, even many representatives see the issue as Indians versus Mexicans... Not a good idea....
3) I thought that some of the signs were extremely offensive to the Americans "We brought you yahoo/hotmail/google" and as such... if I were an American contemplating about my views on the immigration, and if I were as patriotic as many Americans are, I would be upset with the messages putting down local brains...
4) It was a very impressive effort by Chinese group, thumbs up. Although very strange that so ew of them showed up. My CHinese colleague who alreday has GC and helped distribute info to his friends, told me that all 5 Chinese papers in the area had big announcements about the Rally
5) I agree with disappointment about local people, it seemed like there were many more members from CA, NY and other places than VA/MD/DC, we should all be wokring on raising awareness.
All for now
Agains, congrats to all of us
----
Good observation.
Here is my response. to point # 1 & #3.
Look, legal immigration is not just restricted to employment based immigration, it includes family based immigration. So if you say you support legal immigration that doesn't differentiate your message, infact, compared to 950K family based annual visas only 140K go to employment based legal immigrants. IV's agenda is employment based immigration. We are very clear about where we stand.
Now point # 3. No Americans are not upset about confronting the reality about Hotmail, Google and other companies that create jobs for Americans. How can they, we are a country of immigrants. These placards were carefully selected and a lot of due diligence went into their selection and all of them had a positive message.
Having said that, if you notice none of the IV members who attended the rally ever congratulated the Indian or English core members. Your post is the first post which thanks individual communities.
I agree with rest of your message and that is why we need more support from members like you to bring diversity to IV. This is not an Indian organization and we never claim it to be. We need your paricipation to prove that point.
However, I have a whole bunch of points, sorry if they come out strong....
1) I absolutely agree with the 'Legal' Immigration issue, we did look as if we were immigrants and not defined as legal, I think high-skilled is secondary to the legality... This is one of the reasons I have not purchased merchandise, as it looks like it addresses immigration as such. I think banner by Chinese group exphasizing the legal aspect looked very impressive..
2) It was obvious from speeches on Monday night and yesterday (friendship between US and India comments, etc) that this is seen as an Indian issue. Unless you are trying to show it as such, something has to be done about it. Non-indians were marching with you as well, and next time effort should be made to put together Indian, Chinese and whoever else when putting pictures, RollCall for example, or talking to the press, or talking to representatives. I have expressed my desire and submitted all information to the person in charge of organizing meetings on Capitol Hill, but was not provided with this oppportunity..
Basically, it was clear that, as of now, even many representatives see the issue as Indians versus Mexicans... Not a good idea....
3) I thought that some of the signs were extremely offensive to the Americans "We brought you yahoo/hotmail/google" and as such... if I were an American contemplating about my views on the immigration, and if I were as patriotic as many Americans are, I would be upset with the messages putting down local brains...
4) It was a very impressive effort by Chinese group, thumbs up. Although very strange that so ew of them showed up. My CHinese colleague who alreday has GC and helped distribute info to his friends, told me that all 5 Chinese papers in the area had big announcements about the Rally
5) I agree with disappointment about local people, it seemed like there were many more members from CA, NY and other places than VA/MD/DC, we should all be wokring on raising awareness.
All for now
Agains, congrats to all of us
----
Good observation.
Here is my response. to point # 1 & #3.
Look, legal immigration is not just restricted to employment based immigration, it includes family based immigration. So if you say you support legal immigration that doesn't differentiate your message, infact, compared to 950K family based annual visas only 140K go to employment based legal immigrants. IV's agenda is employment based immigration. We are very clear about where we stand.
Now point # 3. No Americans are not upset about confronting the reality about Hotmail, Google and other companies that create jobs for Americans. How can they, we are a country of immigrants. These placards were carefully selected and a lot of due diligence went into their selection and all of them had a positive message.
Having said that, if you notice none of the IV members who attended the rally ever congratulated the Indian or English core members. Your post is the first post which thanks individual communities.
I agree with rest of your message and that is why we need more support from members like you to bring diversity to IV. This is not an Indian organization and we never claim it to be. We need your paricipation to prove that point.
more...
carpediem
06-08 11:32 PM
I was thinking about the inconsistencies pointed out in Mr Oppenheim's interview by some people. My personal opinion is that he may be like some managers in the industry. Managers may not understand the deep down nitty-gritties of their projects. But usually they do understand the broad/big picture of the things their teams are working on.
Mr Oppenheim may have some facts wrong but I am sure he doesn't have the big picture wrong. My 2c. Finally it's just an opinion.
Mr Oppenheim may have some facts wrong but I am sure he doesn't have the big picture wrong. My 2c. Finally it's just an opinion.
2010 desktop wallpaper art. desktop
vin13
02-16 11:46 AM
I am volunteering to coordinate the collection and redemption of airline miles.
Those who would like to donate or in need please PM me with your contact information along with a good time to reach.
if you are donating miles, please also provide the airlines and the number of miles you wish to donate.
I had coordinated this effort during the previous advocacy days and we were successful in helping a few individuals in securing air tickets.
Thanks
Those who would like to donate or in need please PM me with your contact information along with a good time to reach.
if you are donating miles, please also provide the airlines and the number of miles you wish to donate.
I had coordinated this effort during the previous advocacy days and we were successful in helping a few individuals in securing air tickets.
Thanks
more...
vine93
11-12 02:36 PM
Vin13
Thanks for nice draft. I can take initiatives at my state.
Thanks for nice draft. I can take initiatives at my state.
hair Floral Art wallpaper
reddymjm
09-10 01:10 PM
If there are no I-485 pending for EB2 I/C then the demand goes to zero (unless DOS/USCIS uses pending I-140s to decide demand). And if demand < supply then the category goes to current (atleast per the explanation in the demand data document).And definitely if EB2 I/C folks post July 2007 are allowed to file I-485 then USCIS will realize demand is not zero but say 50K. Then again next month PD goes back to late 2007.
I think visa numbers are assigned to I-485 before they are processed for demand data purposes, otherwise the demand data prior to CY 2006 for EB2 I will not be zero with some people with 05 PDs still waiting for GCs. But, again this is all speculation and the situation will be clear by Sep 2011 when almost all of EB2I/C pending I-485s will have been cleared.
There are 34k pending EB3 I and C till 2007. As per the quarterly quota both I and C get 750 a quarter which should place EB2 I and C in pending status. Coming to the last quarter yes they can Put all Current. Its all USCIS anything can happen.
I think visa numbers are assigned to I-485 before they are processed for demand data purposes, otherwise the demand data prior to CY 2006 for EB2 I will not be zero with some people with 05 PDs still waiting for GCs. But, again this is all speculation and the situation will be clear by Sep 2011 when almost all of EB2I/C pending I-485s will have been cleared.
There are 34k pending EB3 I and C till 2007. As per the quarterly quota both I and C get 750 a quarter which should place EB2 I and C in pending status. Coming to the last quarter yes they can Put all Current. Its all USCIS anything can happen.
more...
PD_Dec2002
07-05 12:22 PM
Just my $0.02:
I understand the frustration for IV to gather funds when it has so many members. But it's possible that IV has that many members because it is a free site.
If this becomes a paid site, you might see the number of members dwindle, and that's not a good idea because even if members don't financially contribute to IV, they do offer their perspectives/opinions/feedback/critique and help others. Those who want to financially contribute to IV will do so whether IV is a free or a paid site.
IMHO, it would be a mistake to make IV a paid site thinking that this will force members to financially contribute. Sure IV forums helped a lot with finding information about I-485 applications, but people have been filing I-485s on their own even before IV was in existence. Which is not to say, IV has no value, but I hope you see where I am going with this....if members don't want to contribute, then they won't. They will go to other forums like they used to before IV was in existence...which will be a step down, but at least they are holding on to their $20 or howmuchever.
Before replying to this, please read my disclaimer below. I have to add it given the fact how hot-headed/short-tempered members have been in the last few days where they will flame someone just because their opinions differ.
Thanks,
Jayant
Disclaimer: These are my opinions. You don't have to agree with them. If you disagree, just ignore them. I am not interested in justifying myself about anything that you might have to say. I would, however, welcome a civil and a healthy discussion.
I understand the frustration for IV to gather funds when it has so many members. But it's possible that IV has that many members because it is a free site.
If this becomes a paid site, you might see the number of members dwindle, and that's not a good idea because even if members don't financially contribute to IV, they do offer their perspectives/opinions/feedback/critique and help others. Those who want to financially contribute to IV will do so whether IV is a free or a paid site.
IMHO, it would be a mistake to make IV a paid site thinking that this will force members to financially contribute. Sure IV forums helped a lot with finding information about I-485 applications, but people have been filing I-485s on their own even before IV was in existence. Which is not to say, IV has no value, but I hope you see where I am going with this....if members don't want to contribute, then they won't. They will go to other forums like they used to before IV was in existence...which will be a step down, but at least they are holding on to their $20 or howmuchever.
Before replying to this, please read my disclaimer below. I have to add it given the fact how hot-headed/short-tempered members have been in the last few days where they will flame someone just because their opinions differ.
Thanks,
Jayant
Disclaimer: These are my opinions. You don't have to agree with them. If you disagree, just ignore them. I am not interested in justifying myself about anything that you might have to say. I would, however, welcome a civil and a healthy discussion.
hot fantasy desktop wallpaper,
mirage
03-17 12:26 PM
As far as I know there are atleast 5-6K applicants waiting with PDs before Dec-2003. Considering 3 visas used for each applicant. There'll be a requirement of atleast 15-20K Green Card numbers for Indian EB3 to clear people up to Dec'2003. While EB3 gets a maximum of 3K/Year. My guess is it'll take 5-6 Years to get the EB3 to Dec'2003.
If we assume this poll is a mirror of actual application load at USCIS then 70% applications were filed before January 2005 (529/750). Out of 529, 223 were filed during June 2003 or before (42% load). Now during last May-June 2007 EB3-I's current PD reached to June 2003. So assuming current stuck ones were product of either PBEC/DBEC labor approval delay and /or Name check delay, they will be virtually ready to go, I mean get a GC rightaway. People with PD having DEC 2003 and before will have fair chance as well.
If we assume this poll is a mirror of actual application load at USCIS then 70% applications were filed before January 2005 (529/750). Out of 529, 223 were filed during June 2003 or before (42% load). Now during last May-June 2007 EB3-I's current PD reached to June 2003. So assuming current stuck ones were product of either PBEC/DBEC labor approval delay and /or Name check delay, they will be virtually ready to go, I mean get a GC rightaway. People with PD having DEC 2003 and before will have fair chance as well.
more...
house desktop wallpaper art.
sugaur
08-22 09:50 AM
This person is a racist who thinks we are all "Middle Eastern" who want to blow things up here. She prefers we all go back "where we came from". Read her previous post. She feels she is "owed" a green card even though she broke all the rules. Why are you guys trying to help this person? Isnt it a crime to try and help a person evade immigration laws?
tattoo desktop wallpaper art. cool
singhsa3
03-03 01:16 PM
I just sent a request to CNN to take a look at this thread. A formal letter may be sent soon. So please continue to vote and participate.
more...
pictures Fairy Art Wallpapers
sanjith
09-03 10:19 AM
need to know the process of conversion of L1 to H4
dresses desktop wallpaper art.
feedfront
11-09 12:20 PM
Congrats ! How long did it take for CPO email since u recieved the 485 , I-797 and which service center
Well, my case is with TSC. But, it is not yet approved. That email was sent by mistake. I've responded to RFE in Sept's end. Waiting for .....
Well, my case is with TSC. But, it is not yet approved. That email was sent by mistake. I've responded to RFE in Sept's end. Waiting for .....
more...
makeup Arts Desktop Wallpaper 9
transpass
04-10 12:07 PM
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
girlfriend Art Wallpapers , CG Girls
shantanup
11-18 10:11 AM
Receipt number: 2008065217
hairstyles Free desktop wallpaper of
feedfront
09-14 12:23 PM
I've been current since July, 2010 and got RFE on Sept 10, 2010. I don't have letter with me as yet to know about RFE.
Before I got REF email, I waited for few weeks then tried followings:
1) Took infopass : Officer sent email to expedite.
2) Wrote to Senator: got reply they would get reply in 60-90 days
3) Sent an email via attorney to TSC: got automated response.
Waiting for RFE mail...
Before I got REF email, I waited for few weeks then tried followings:
1) Took infopass : Officer sent email to expedite.
2) Wrote to Senator: got reply they would get reply in 60-90 days
3) Sent an email via attorney to TSC: got automated response.
Waiting for RFE mail...
BharatPremi
03-17 12:56 PM
As far as I know there are atleast 5-6K applicants waiting with PDs before Dec-2003. Considering 3 visas used for each applicant. There'll be a requirement of atleast 15-20K Green Card numbers for Indian EB3 to clear people up to Dec'2003. While EB3 gets a maximum of 3K/Year. My guess is it'll take 5-6 Years to get the EB3 to Dec'2003.
Including spillover generally EB3-I clears up around 5000 visas per year on average ( Though theoratically stuck at 3300-3500). 3 visas per applicant is at bit high end. I would not assume everybody is married AND have child.. I would put that around 1.75. But, yes, even if select these new parameters than also it would take years..Theoratically, ofcourse:):)
Including spillover generally EB3-I clears up around 5000 visas per year on average ( Though theoratically stuck at 3300-3500). 3 visas per applicant is at bit high end. I would not assume everybody is married AND have child.. I would put that around 1.75. But, yes, even if select these new parameters than also it would take years..Theoratically, ofcourse:):)
go_guy123
09-09 03:05 PM
With republican House there is zero chance of anything happening on any kind of immigration bill. Nothing other than border security will be taken up. It will be best to kiss good bye to GC dreams if republicans win the House.
yes you will get border security (more national guards/agents at the border, mandatory SSN check )
in exchange for SKIL bill. GOP will thrown the illegals under the bus with backing of technology lobby (opposite of what the democratic party does: throw the skilled immigrants under under the bus at every oppotunity)
yes you will get border security (more national guards/agents at the border, mandatory SSN check )
in exchange for SKIL bill. GOP will thrown the illegals under the bus with backing of technology lobby (opposite of what the democratic party does: throw the skilled immigrants under under the bus at every oppotunity)
No comments:
Post a Comment